The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   FT violation? (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/93464-ft-violation.html)

Sharpshooternes Wed Jan 09, 2013 08:47pm
FT violation?
 
FT shooter at the FT line, I bounce pass the ball to her. She takes a couple of dribbles and then dribbles off her own foot. The ball rolls away to my P at T. I look at him and mouth "violation?" He shakes his head and bounces the ball back to shooter who shoots FT. No one complains or says anything. I am guessing this is a FT violation.

Freddy Wed Jan 09, 2013 08:56pm
You'll Own This One Now!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes (Post 871250)
FT shooter at the FT line, I bounce pass the ball to her. She takes a couple of dribbles and then dribbles off her own foot. The ball rolls away to my P at T. I look at him and mouth "violation?" He shakes his head and bounces the ball back to shooter who shoots FT. No one complains or says anything. I am guessing this is a FT violation.
9.1.1
Your after-the-fact guess has basis in the rules.
No one "complained or said anything" because they didn't know either.

BillyMac Thu Jan 10, 2013 07:32am
Note Two Situations ...
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freddy (Post 871252)
9.1.1
9.1.1 SITUATION: A1, at the free-throw line to attempt a free throw: (a) muffs
the pass from the official and it rolls forward; or (b) while performing his/her
habitual dribbles prior to the release, accidentally allows the ball to deflect off
his/her foot into the lane. RULING: In (a), the official should sound the whistle to
prevent any violations and then start the free throw procedure again. No freethrow
violation should be called in this situation. In (b), a free-throw violation
shall be called on A1. (9-1-3a, e)

Sharpshooternes Thu Jan 10, 2013 11:15am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 871300)
9.1.1 SITUATION: A1, at the free-throw line to attempt a free throw: (a) muffs
the pass from the official and it rolls forward; or (b) while performing his/her
habitual dribbles prior to the release, accidentally allows the ball to deflect off
his/her foot into the lane. RULING: In (a), the official should sound the whistle to
prevent any violations and then start the free throw procedure again. No freethrow
violation should be called in this situation. In (b), a free-throw violation
shall be called on A1. (9-1-3a, e)
This was definitely a b) situation.

Jesse James Thu Jan 10, 2013 11:23am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes (Post 871250)
FT shooter at the FT line, I bounce pass the ball to her. She takes a couple of dribbles and then dribbles off her own foot. The ball rolls away to my P at T. I look at him and mouth "violation?" He shakes his head and bounces the ball back to shooter who shoots FT. No one complains or says anything. I am guessing this is a FT violation.
It doesn't excuse your partner today, but not that many years ago he would have been correct. Back then, you were to kill the play (before anyone violated lines), and toss it back to the free thrower.

LeeBallanfant Thu Jan 10, 2013 02:15pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 871300)
9.1.1 SITUATION: A1, at the free-throw line to attempt a free throw: (a) muffs
the pass from the official and it rolls forward; or (b) while performing his/her
habitual dribbles prior to the release, accidentally allows the ball to deflect off
his/her foot into the lane. RULING: In (a), the official should sound the whistle to
prevent any violations and then start the free throw procedure again. No freethrow
violation should be called in this situation. In (b), a free-throw violation
shall be called on A1. (9-1-3a, e)
Silly Question Here: For (b) what is the difference in deflecting the ball off the foot as opposed to 'while performing habitual dribbles' breaks the free throw line plane.

bob jenkins Thu Jan 10, 2013 02:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeeBallanfant (Post 871357)
Silly Question Here: For (b) what is the difference in deflecting the ball off the foot as opposed to 'while performing habitual dribbles' breaks the free throw line plane.
The implication is that the ball gets away and either someone else would have to get the ball or the shooter would have to leave the semi-circle to get the ball.

Freddy Thu Jan 10, 2013 02:22pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeeBallanfant (Post 871357)
Silly Question Here: For (b) what is the difference in deflecting the ball off the foot as opposed to 'while performing habitual dribbles' breaks the free throw line plane.
Zip...zero...nada... Both are free throw violations (assuming you mean, in your second part, that the FT-er's foot illegally breaks the plane of the free throw line).

Adam Thu Jan 10, 2013 02:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeeBallanfant (Post 871357)
Silly Question Here: For (b) what is the difference in deflecting the ball off the foot as opposed to 'while performing habitual dribbles' breaks the free throw line plane.
Because it isn't a violation unless the foot breaks the plane. That doesn't happen by dribbling. In the case, it pretty much has to, although the case eliminates any potential to back out of the violation with a timeout.

VaTerp Thu Jan 10, 2013 04:23pm
If the ball rolled out to the T did the FT shooter's foot ever break the plane?

I remember having a similar play many many years ago during AAU ball. Shooter didnt move, ball bounced away and I did a reset.

The T just bounced the ball to the shooter without a reset and giving it to you as the lead?

icallfouls Thu Jan 10, 2013 04:33pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes (Post 871250)
FT shooter at the FT line, I bounce pass the ball to her. She takes a couple of dribbles and then dribbles off her own foot. The ball rolls away to my P at T. I look at him and mouth "violation?" He shakes his head and bounces the ball back to shooter who shoots FT. No one complains or says anything. I am guessing this is a FT violation.
Why didn't you call it instead of asking?

It is frustrating working with officials that don't know the rules.

This crew 0 for 2

BillyMac Thu Jan 10, 2013 06:21pm
Primary Coverage Area ???
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by icallfouls (Post 871395)
Why didn't you call it instead of asking?
Because it's the trial's primary coverage area on a free throw?

If I were the lead, I would wait a few seconds, enough time for the trail to sound his whistle, if he didn't, then I would sound mine. I know that it's not my primary, but I'm not letting an obvious violation like this pass.

BktBallRef Thu Jan 10, 2013 07:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes (Post 871250)
FT shooter at the FT line, I bounce pass the ball to her. She takes a couple of dribbles and then dribbles off her own foot. The ball rolls away to my P at T. I look at him and mouth "violation?" He shakes his head and bounces the ball back to shooter who shoots FT. No one complains or says anything. I am guessing this is a FT violation.
How old was the shooter?

Sharpshooternes Sun Jan 13, 2013 03:04am
Quote:
Originally Posted by icallfouls (Post 871395)
Why didn't you call it instead of asking?

It is frustrating working with officials that don't know the rules.

This crew 0 for 2
Ouch, a little harsh don't you think? I am only a third year official. I thought it was a violation and asked my more seasoned varsity partner quickly who said no. I couldn't quote the rule thus would be unable to properly explain to a coach why I called it. To me, "It just is..." is a piss poor excuse to give to coaches. It is a measly little case play and nothing in the rules says anything about this being a violation. Now I know. And I know what you mean about working with officials that don't know the rules, although it is more frustrating when they call traveling on a loose ball slide or 3 seconds while ball is in the backcourt. Those are everyday plays that we should be getting right. I have never seen anyone lose control of the ball on a FT, ever... This is a rare play.
Thanks for the condescention.

Sharpshooternes Sun Jan 13, 2013 03:04am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BktBallRef (Post 871427)
How old was the shooter?
Freshman girl

Sharpshooternes Sun Jan 13, 2013 03:05am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 871417)
Because it's the trial's primary coverage area on a free throw?

If I were the lead, I would wait a few seconds, enough time for the trail to sound his whistle, if he didn't, then I would sound mine. I know that it's not my primary, but I'm not letting an obvious violation like this pass.
Next time... this. ;)

Rich Sun Jan 13, 2013 12:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes (Post 871918)
Ouch, a little harsh don't you think? I am only a third year official. I thought it was a violation and asked my more seasoned varsity partner quickly who said no. I couldn't quote the rule thus would be unable to properly explain to a coach why I called it. To me, "It just is..." is a piss poor excuse to give to coaches. It is a measly little case play and nothing in the rules says anything about this being a violation. Now I know. And I know what you mean about working with officials that don't know the rules, although it is more frustrating when they call traveling on a loose ball slide or 3 seconds while ball is in the backcourt. Those are everyday plays that we should be getting right. I have never seen anyone lose control of the ball on a FT, ever... This is a rare play.
Thanks for the condescention.
Did not knowing this make you commit to studying the case book on a daily basis?

The reason many of us are condescending is that when a situation happens that only happens once in a great while, a lot of officials blow it off and say, "well, that doesn't happen often." They say, "It is a measly little case play." That's a terrible attitude. You didn't know the rule and yet you're still blowing it off.

Even the worst on-court officials can be great with the rules. And if you're a good on-court official, it doesn't cost you anything extra to be great with the rules.

Lotto Sun Jan 13, 2013 12:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 871300)
9.1.1 SITUATION: A1, at the free-throw line to attempt a free throw: (a) muffs
the pass from the official and it rolls forward; or (b) while performing his/her
habitual dribbles prior to the release, accidentally allows the ball to deflect off
his/her foot into the lane. RULING: In (a), the official should sound the whistle to
prevent any violations and then start the free throw procedure again. No freethrow
violation should be called in this situation. In (b), a free-throw violation
shall be called on A1. (9-1-3a, e)
That's interesting -- the NCAA case is completely different:

A.R. 206. A1, at the free-throw line to attempt a free throw, receives the ball from the official, who starts a silent count. While bouncing the ball, A1 strikes the ball on his/her knee or leg accidentally, and the ball rolls toward the basket between the free-throw lane lines.
RULING: The official shall sound the whistle at once, causing the ball to become dead. The official should caution the free-thrower, place the ball at the disposal of A1 and start a new silent count.

Sharpshooternes Sun Jan 13, 2013 11:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich (Post 871935)
Did not knowing this make you commit to studying the case book on a daily basis?

The reason many of us are condescending is that when a situation happens that only happens once in a great while, a lot of officials blow it off and say, "well, that doesn't happen often." They say, "It is a measly little case play." That's a terrible attitude. You didn't know the rule and yet you're still blowing it off.

Even the worst on-court officials can be great with the rules. And if you're a good on-court official, it doesn't cost you anything extra to be great with the rules.
I am in the rule book and case book everyday, even before this happened. Just because I read it once or twice doesn't mean it is solidified in the memory banks nor does it mean that I would know the proper procedure for calling a violation or foul, just becuase I read about it. Like I said, I now know the rule, why, the penalty and how to administer it in the future, including whistling outside my PCA and taking the call from a senior official who doesn't know what they are doing either. I wasn't blowing it off, I just hadn't had to put it into practice so I was unsure of myself. In basketball there is book smarts and there are street smarts and you have to have both. I am getting to be pretty book smart, but still have a long way to go with the street smarts.

My point to you and icallfouls is please keep the condescention to yourselves. Isn't this forum's purpose to discuss rules, situations, and anything else basketball for the betterment of the collective group as a whole? Saying "you and are your partner are terrible officials" doesn't help anyone, and it may actually drive people from the forum so they don't continue to improve, this does not benifit our avocation, reputation or help create better officials for the future. What would be benificial is to offer up advice for how to improve and continue to share and pay forward the knowledge that many of you experts on this forum have. We younger officials glean a ton of knowledge and wisdom from those of you that have been doing this for decades, and we appreciate it.

Do you truly think that I just blew it off as "oh it is just a rare play, It doesn't really matter if I missed it." ? If you think this you are wrong. If I was blowing it off, I wouldn't have taken the time to figure out the proper call, and not only that, know I have shared my experience with potentially hundreds of other officials so hopefully, someone else can benefit from my error and prevent them from making the same mistake. I did not "blow it off."

And I would never watch one of your games and say "Oh that is a terrible official" just because you made a mistake. We all make them. No one is perfect. It is and was a learning moment for me and for each of us every time we or a partner makes a mistake. I would tactfully point out the situation to you and ask your opinion on why you did what you did and what you would do in the future.

just another ref Mon Jan 14, 2013 01:09am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes (Post 871918)
Ouch, a little harsh don't you think? I am only a third year official. I thought it was a violation and asked my more seasoned varsity partner quickly who said no. I couldn't quote the rule thus would be unable to properly explain to a coach why I called it. To me, "It just is..." is a piss poor excuse to give to coaches. It is a measly little case play and nothing in the rules says anything about this being a violation. Now I know. And I know what you mean about working with officials that don't know the rules, although it is more frustrating when they call traveling on a loose ball slide or 3 seconds while ball is in the backcourt. Those are everyday plays that we should be getting right. I have never seen anyone lose control of the ball on a FT, ever... This is a rare play.
Thanks for the condescention.
Just look at it this way. You came here for information, which is plentiful. Just like anyplace else, people have different ways of communicating. It is up to you to sort through the information and hang onto what you consider useful. The delivery of the information? You may like it, and you may not, but the nastiest guy here will probably speak to you more nicely than your average coach.

You knew the job was dangerous when you took it.

Now for my opinion: Giving an explanation of a violation to a coach is not something to spend a lot of time worrying about. He saw what happened. He heard the whistle. It's kinda self explanatory. At worst, you say "She dribbled it off her foot, that's a violation." How certain of any rule do you have to be before you will actually blow the whistle? Only you can decide.

Sharpshooternes Mon Jan 14, 2013 03:25am
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 872008)
Just look at it this way. You came here for information, which is plentiful. Just like anyplace else, people have different ways of communicating. It is up to you to sort through the information and hang onto what you consider useful. The delivery of the information? You may like it, and you may not, but the nastiest guy here will probably speak to you more nicely than your average coach.
Fair enough.


Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 872008)
You knew the job was dangerous when you took it.
Now for my opinion: Giving an explanation of a violation to a coach is not something to spend a lot of time worrying about. He saw what happened. He heard the whistle. It's kinda self explanatory. At worst, you say "She dribbled it off her foot, that's a violation." How certain of any rule do you have to be before you will actually blow the whistle? Only you can decide.
Great point. I guess I needed to be more assertive and confident in my own ability and understanding of the rules and go get that one, regardless of how "senior" my partner may be.

icallfouls Mon Jan 14, 2013 12:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes (Post 871918)
Ouch, a little harsh don't you think? I am only a third year official. I thought it was a violation and asked my more seasoned varsity partner quickly who said no. I couldn't quote the rule thus would be unable to properly explain to a coach why I called it. To me, "It just is..." is a piss poor excuse to give to coaches. It is a measly little case play and nothing in the rules says anything about this being a violation. Now I know. And I know what you mean about working with officials that don't know the rules, although it is more frustrating when they call traveling on a loose ball slide or 3 seconds while ball is in the backcourt. Those are everyday plays that we should be getting right. I have never seen anyone lose control of the ball on a FT, ever... This is a rare play.
Thanks for the condescention.
Wasn't trying to be harsh or condescending, but now here you go.

I really don't think that "being a 3rd year official" is an excuse for not knowing the rules. That particular situation has been in the manuals previously (try your online casebook if you don't, have your manuals with you, it can be found 9.1.1 Situation. It is apparent that more officials need to spend more time on the rules. Do yourself, your partners, and the game a favor, learn the rules.

We aren't getting paid to gradually learn the rules, or learn them as we go. Your said that you are "only a third year official" which is a "piss poor excuse." I have worked college games with 3rd year officials that have saved the crew because they took the time to learn and know the rules while they were working to improve other aspects of their game.

If you have not seen this play ever, work more youth games, it happens. That is why it is in the book, that you have yet to read. Did you even look it up after your game? Do you take your rule books with you to games?

We need our partners to know the rules. Be the partner the crew has confidence in, not the partner we can't go to because rules knowledge is weak.

Raymond Mon Jan 14, 2013 12:35pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by icallfouls (Post 872069)
...
If you have not seen this play ever, work more youth games, it happens. That is why it is in the book, that you have yet to read. Did you even look it up after your game? Do you take your rule books with you to games?
....
Ahh, you've hit on my pet peeve. It's one thing to not know a rule during a game or halftime discussion. We've all had that happen to us. But I don't understand how a serious official would not then FIRST go to the rule and case books himself before coming to this site to ask other officials what the rule is.

maven Mon Jan 14, 2013 01:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 872072)
But I don't understand how a serious official would not then FIRST go to the rule and case books himself before coming to this site to ask other officials what the rule is.
Really? It's so much easier to ask you than to pore through the dang books!

icallfouls Mon Jan 14, 2013 01:22pm
see below

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes (Post 872004)
I am in the rule book and case book everyday, Every day? Then it would seem that you should be more familiar. Or were you using it for a pillow? even before this happened. Just because I read it once or twice doesn't mean it is solidified in the memory banks nor does it mean that I would know the proper procedure for calling a violation or foul, just becuase I read about it. Like I said, I now know the rule, why, the penalty and how to administer it in the future, including whistling outside my PCA and taking the call from a senior official who doesn't know what they are doing either. Then how senior were they really? Maybe just older. I wasn't blowing it off, I just hadn't had to put it into practice so I was unsure of myself. In basketball there is book smarts and there are street smarts and you have to have both. I am getting to be pretty book smart, but still have a long way to go with the street smarts.

My point to you and icallfouls is please keep the condescention to yourselves. Isn't this forum's purpose to discuss rules, situations, and anything else basketball for the betterment of the collective group as a whole? Saying "you and are your partner are terrible officials" no one said terrible, you did.doesn't help anyone, and it may actually drive people from the forum if your feelings are hurt, maybe officiating isn't for you. so they don't continue to improve, this does not benifit our avocation, reputation or help create better officials for the future. What would be benificial is to offer up advice myself and others said the best advice - get into the rulebooks - it is advice, sorry you don't see it that way. for how to improve and continue to share and pay forward the knowledge that many of you experts on this forum have. We younger officials glean a ton of knowledge and wisdom from those of you that have been doing this for decades, and we appreciate it.

Do you truly think that I just blew it off as "oh it is just a rare play, It doesn't really matter if I missed it." ? If you think this you are wrong. If I was blowing it off, I wouldn't have taken the time to figure out no you didn't, you could have learned it by READING YOUR RULEBOOK the proper call, and not only that, know I have shared my experience with potentially hundreds of other officials so hopefully, someone else can benefit from my error and prevent them from making the same mistake. I did not "blow it off."

And I would never watch one of your games and say "Oh that is a terrible official" just because you made a mistakenot knowing the rules is not a mistake, a mistake is pointing the wrong direction on an OOB play.. We all make them. No one is perfect. It is and was a learning moment for me and for each of us every time we or a partner makes a mistake. I would tactfully point out the situation to you and ask your opinion on why you did what you did and what you would do in the future.

icallfouls Mon Jan 14, 2013 01:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by maven (Post 872087)
Really? It's so much easier to ask you than to pore through the dang books!
Your tag line says it best "quality is a habit."

Then next part is developing good habits and eliminating bad habits. The good habit should be to look it up after the game and relay that information to the partner. Finding where the information is located is a good habit, rather than to rely on the work and word of others.

Don't get me wrong, I don't mind helping newer officials, but they have to help themselves first.

bob jenkins Mon Jan 14, 2013 01:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by icallfouls (Post 872099)
Your tag line says it best "quality is a habit."

Then next part is developing good habits and eliminating bad habits. The good habit should be to look it up after the game and relay that information to the partner. Finding where the information is located is a good habit, rather than to rely on the work and word of others.

Don't get me wrong, I don't mind helping newer officials, but they have to help themselves first.
"You'll learn it better if you look it up yourself and you'll likely find something else you didn't know."

BillyMac Mon Jan 14, 2013 01:36pm
The Ink Is Black, The Page Is White ...
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by maven (Post 872087)
It's so much easier to ask you than to pore through the dang books!
And this is the twenty-first century. In my opinion, this Forum is as much of a research tool as a paper, and ink, rulebook, and casebook. We have many tools in our "officials tool belt", rulebook, casebook, mechanics manual, digital versions of the three previously mentioned tools, DVD's of plays, colleagues on our local board, interpreters on our local boards, camps, local board websites, and the Forum. The Forum just happens to be one of those tools, one that wasn't available to us twenty years ago. It's better to "get straight" on the rules here on Al Gore's internet, then to not ever "get straight" on the rules. I know that other Forum members disagree with me, but that's my story, and I'm sticking to it.

icallfouls Mon Jan 14, 2013 01:37pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 872100)
"You'll learn it better if you look it up yourself and you'll likely find something else you didn't know."
Well said, Thanks Bob!

Raymond Mon Jan 14, 2013 02:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 872102)
... It's better to "get straight" on the rules here on Al Gore's internet, then to not ever "get straight" on the rules. I know that other Forum members disagree with me, but that's my story, and I'm sticking to it.
It's better to look the rule up yourself and THEN come here and say "I read 9.1.1 but I'm still not sure if it applies to my situation".

If you come here without looking it up yourself your first 2 replies might be from "Old School" and you're no better off then when you started.

BillyMac Mon Jan 14, 2013 02:43pm
The Future Is Now ...
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 872124)
It's better to look the rule up yourself and then come here.
I won't give you a big argument about this, to each his own, but, why can't "look(ing) the rule up yourself" include looking up the rule on the Forum and reading some "words" on your smartphone, laptop, tablet, or personal computer? I realize that looking something up on the Forum is somewhat different than looking up some "words" in a paper, and ink book, but is it really that different? Would you consider the Forum "Search" feature as "look(ing) up the rule yourself"? It's really not wasting our time because we don't have to respond to questions that we feel are undeserving of our attention.

And, please don't mention (that name) two more times.

Raymond Mon Jan 14, 2013 03:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 872131)
....Would you consider the Forum "Search" feature as "look(ing) up the rule yourself"? ....
I would consider it research. But still, the response might be 2 years old and outdated. So, again, what have you gained?

At what point do you look up the rule yourself? An official needs to be able to navigate through the rule book on their own.

BillyMac Mon Jan 14, 2013 03:33pm
The Information Age ...
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 872134)
At what point do you look up the rule yourself? An official needs to be able to navigate through the rule book on their own.
"On your own" is the key to our polite, I hope, disagreement. I do see a difference in reading a paper, and ink, book, or a digital PDF file, on your own, written by bunch of experts, and reading a website, on your own, that offers the views of many that differ in their expertise, but a website that does feature many experts, but where you see a big difference, I only see a small difference.

Again, it's really not wasting our time because we don't have to respond to questions that we feel are undeserving of our attention, we can just ignore them. I chose not to ignore them, others may chose otherwise.

It's the Information Age. As an old fart, I'm having more trouble adjusting to it than most of you young whippersnappers, but I do understand that information will be accessible in many different ways, ways in the near future that many of us, in the present, can't even begin to imagine.

Raymond Mon Jan 14, 2013 04:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 872142)
"On your own" is the key to our polite, I hope, disagreement. I do see a difference in reading a paper, and ink, book, or a digital PDF file, on your own, written by bunch of experts, and reading a website, on your own, that offers the views of many that differ in their expertise, but a website that does feature many experts, but where you see a big difference, I only see a small difference.

Again, it's really not wasting our time because we don't have to respond to questions that we feel are undeserving of our attention, we can just ignore them. I chose not to ignore them, others may chose otherwise.

It's the Information Age. As an old fart, I'm having more trouble adjusting to it than most of you young whippersnappers, but I do understand that information will be accessible in many different ways, ways in the near future that many of us, in the present, can't even begin to imagine.
I never said it was "wasting our time", so I don't know why you are using that phrase. But you are pawning off the rule book as "paper and ink written by some experts" and equating it to some supposed experts spouting off our opinions and interpretations. The 2 are not the same.

You need to know the rule before you can discuss its interpretation or have an opinion on it.

MD Longhorn Mon Jan 14, 2013 04:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by icallfouls (Post 872069)
I have worked college games with 3rd year officials that have saved the crew because they took the time to learn and know the rules while they were working to improve other aspects of their game.
So what was your, and your more experience crew's, piss poor excuse for not knowing a rule that a third year guy knows? ??? !!!!???!!!!???

Just jabbin ya, :) (although there is a point in there somewhere, I think)

Raymond Mon Jan 14, 2013 04:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MD Longhorn (Post 872159)
So what was your, and your more experience crew's, piss poor excuse for not knowing a rule that a third year guy knows? ??? !!!!???!!!!???

Just jabbin ya, :) (although there is a point in there somewhere, I think)
Your point is valid. But I think the point of icallfoul's rant is that "only being a 3rd year official" is not an excuse to not know a rule b/c there are plenty of 3rd year officials who know the book inside and out.

If you don't know a rule, you just don't know the rule.

MD Longhorn Mon Jan 14, 2013 04:07pm
BTW - while I do agree that this site is a resource... I truly think looking for it in the book is FAR superior. How many times have we grabbed the book to look for something, and while looking for it discover something else entirely? Ask the question here, and you get the answer to just that question (along with a semi-polite discussion regarding whether asking the forum is as good as looking it up, along with a minor bruise on your ego when you're told to look it up yourself). Look for the answer in the book, and you'll find the answer - and likely learn something else along the way.

A less strong version of getting a fish or learning to fish.

MD Longhorn Mon Jan 14, 2013 04:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 872161)
Your point is valid. But I think the point of icallfoul's rant is that "only being a 3rd year official" is not an excuse to not know a rule b/c there are plenty of 3rd year officials who know the book inside and out.

If you don't know a rule, you just don't know the rule.
Completely fair enough... and ps - sorry to hear about your member. Sounds like it hurts.

Raymond Mon Jan 14, 2013 04:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MD Longhorn (Post 872164)
.... Look for the answer in the book, and you'll find the answer - and likely learn something else along the way.

A less strong version of getting a fish or learning to fish.
Also, looking up the rule will trigger some scenarios and questions in your head. Then you come to the mountaintop looking for answers that are not so black and white.

Raymond Mon Jan 14, 2013 04:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MD Longhorn (Post 872165)
... and ps - sorry to hear about your member. Sounds like it hurts.
To be part of this club, the initiation was worth it.

VaTerp Mon Jan 14, 2013 04:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lotto (Post 871936)
That's interesting -- the NCAA case is completely different:

A.R. 206. A1, at the free-throw line to attempt a free throw, receives the ball from the official, who starts a silent count. While bouncing the ball, A1 strikes the ball on his/her knee or leg accidentally, and the ball rolls toward the basket between the free-throw lane lines.
RULING: The official shall sound the whistle at once, causing the ball to become dead. The official should caution the free-thrower, place the ball at the disposal of A1 and start a new silent count.
IMO this is a much more logical approach.

And I'm still not sure we had a violation in the OP. The ball rolled out to the T. So did it roll "forward" or "into the lane" per the case play? If the ball/shooter's foot never broke the plane or the ball is retrieved and shot released within 10 seconds then do we still have a violation?

Rich Mon Jan 14, 2013 05:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by VaTerp (Post 872177)
IMO this is a much more logical approach.

And I'm still not sure we had a violation in the OP. The ball rolled out to the T. So did it roll "forward" or "into the lane" per the case play? If the ball/shooter's foot never broke the plane or the ball is retrieved and shot released within 10 seconds then do we still have a violation?
Yes, in NFHS rules.

BillyMac Mon Jan 14, 2013 06:31pm
Rules, Interpretations, Opinions ...
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 872158)
You need to know the rule before you can discuss its interpretation or have an opinion on it.
Agree 100%.

However, some may come to the Forum not to get, or give, an interpretation; not to get, or give, an opinion; but to just get the rule straight, so that they will know the rule, understand the rule, and then maybe get into interpretations, or opinions, for themselves, or for the good of the cause.

Once an official knows the rules, then I see no problem with that official coming to the Forum for some help with a rule question.

And I have no problem with coaches, parents, or fans coming straight to the Forum. They don't have to be officials to post on the Forum, right?

Nobody could learn all the rules by just studying the Forum. Impossible. We're good, but not that good. You have to start with the rulebook, casebook, and mechanics manual, but after that, the Forum is a great informational, and educational, resource.

jeremy341a Tue Jan 15, 2013 10:21am
I feel it should be a violation in the fact that if the ball rolls a way they shooter can not retreive it without crossing a boundry and if they don't retreive it they will not shoot the ball with in 10 seconds.

Rich Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremy341a (Post 872291)
I feel it should be a violation in the fact that if the ball rolls a way they shooter can not retreive it without crossing a boundry and if they don't retreive it they will not shoot the ball with in 10 seconds.
Feelings are irrelevant. What's the rule/case play say?

Sharpshooternes Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:13pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by icallfouls (Post 872069)
Wasn't trying to be harsh or condescending, but now here you go.

I really don't think that "being a 3rd year official" is an excuse for not knowing the rules. That particular situation has been in the manuals previously (try your online casebook if you don't, have your manuals with you, it can be found 9.1.1 Situation. It is apparent that more officials need to spend more time on the rules. Do yourself, your partners, and the game a favor, learn the rules.

We aren't getting paid to gradually learn the rules, or learn them as we go. Your said that you are "only a third year official" which is a "piss poor excuse." I have worked college games with 3rd year officials that have saved the crew because they took the time to learn and know the rules while they were working to improve other aspects of their game.

If you have not seen this play ever, work more youth games, it happens. That is why it is in the book, that you have yet to read. Did you even look it up after your game? Do you take your rule books with you to games?

We need our partners to know the rules. Be the partner the crew has confidence in, not the partner we can't go to because rules knowledge is weak.
You are right no excuses. More time in the books it is. Yes I did look it up after the game and yes I take the rules book and case book and handbook with me to every game.
No one knows every rule perfectly, every case play perfectly or can rule properly every situation, every time. No one.

Sharpshooternes Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:17pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 872100)
"You'll learn it better if you look it up yourself and you'll likely find something else you didn't know."
I'll agree with this Bob.

jeremy341a Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich (Post 872313)
Feelings are irrelevant. What's the rule/case play say?
Sorry I forgot to quote the poster who earlier said that the no violation would be a much more logical rule. I was just stating my thoughts that it should be a violation due to what I mentioned. I don't see why someone should get a do over bc of their error.

BillyMac Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:41pm
I Have A Question ???
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremy341a (Post 872291)
I feel it should be a violation in the fact that if the ball rolls a way they shooter can not retreive it without crossing a boundry and if they don't retreive it they will not shoot the ball with in 10 seconds.
No player control, so no time out to prevent a violation?

bob jenkins Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:49pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 872322)
No player control, so no time out to prevent a violation?
Player control is not required, but according to the rule it's an immediate violation.

Personally, I'd support a change.

BillyMac Tue Jan 15, 2013 01:03pm
Forget the muff, or dropped ball, for now. Pretend the shooter still has the ball in her hands.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 872325)
Player control is not required.
For the shooter's team to call a timeout during a live ball?

jeremy341a Tue Jan 15, 2013 01:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 872322)
No player control, so no time out to prevent a violation?
I would agree to this.

BillyMac Tue Jan 15, 2013 01:22pm
Always Listen To bob ...
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremy341a (Post 872328)
I would agree to this.
If it wasn't an immediate violation as bob jenkins stated earlier.

bob jenkins Tue Jan 15, 2013 01:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 872327)
Forget the muff, or dropped ball, for now. Pretend the shooter still has the ball in her hands.



For the shooter's team to call a timeout during a live ball?
I meant it as more of a generic statement than just this play. Sorry for the confusion.

But, if A can request a TO to prevent a vioaltion under the ROP procedure, then why shouldn't they be able to request one here? (under a rules change)

icallfouls Tue Jan 15, 2013 01:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes (Post 872314)
You are right no excuses. More time in the books it is. Yes I did look it up after the game and yes I take the rules book and case book and handbook with me to every game.
No one knows every rule perfectly, every case play perfectly or can rule properly every situation, every time. No one.
Speak for yourself :)


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:09pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1